Haha fake news ABC suspending Brian Ross for 4 weeks because of the massive embarrassment. They also read the "breaking news" on The View while the women who make up the program cheered. Absolutely hilarious that people actually think this Russia witch hunt bullcrap is going to bring down Trump in any way.

"I'm sure the prosecutor was dying to indict Flynn for some scheme or conspiracy but there is nothing there and he had to finally come down and indict him for lying, which makes him a useless witness," - Dershowitz

Yep. So far waiting and seeing has brought more and more truth out. Lying to the FBI is a crime. When we have devolved to the point in which we are nitpicking that people are "just lying" it's telling.

I personally never really believed it was that big of a thing. The facts are proving how little we knew about what has been going on in the last 4-5 years. Very clearly Russia has been systematically disrupting world politics through misinformation campaigns. Who knows? Right now the best proof I've seen is how hard certain groups have tried to supress our understanding of what did happen. I'm not an attorney but hindering an investigation through even legal means is a dubious thing for an innocent party.

I love it when laymen use the word "theory." If I see that word with no qualifier it's a sort of validation of the use of evidence. Maybe they use the semantics purposefully but usually facts bear out that - no. I'd personally qualify it with "conspiracy" or some other term.

I don't think we get to see the evidence in an ongoing investigation. That's kind of how it works. We can choose to follow instinct and trust but verify or we can choose to believe that everything is a conspiracy. Typically legal cases in which people get arrested and make plea deals have veracity.

Why do you have good reason to push back? What real issues, the wall? Insurance? Deporting illegals?

If Trump's innocent you've got no reason to interject on his behalf. When Obama was accused of being African he supplied his birth certificate. People want to see Trump's taxes, misdirect. People want to know why he's got half a dozen people on his team that can't remember meetings they had with Russia less than a year ago, misdirect. You're instructed to misdirect, you misdirect. You don't have to, you shouldn't have to, but you do anyways.

And yes, as Feeb stated, we have just as much of an idea of the actual evidence put together in the investigation as Molyneaux above has, that's why we're having an investigation. But y'all are like "Leave Trump alone!" because Trump's saying "Leave Trump alone, why aren't you looking at the REAL IMPORTANT STUFF instead?".

Let the investigation finish so you can tell us you told us so already. Why fight it? There's enough evidence to investigate, or else it wouldn't be being investigated.*

Keeping in mind the most the Clinton probe got was a lollipop, there at least APPEARS to be enough evidence to investigate.

All of the evidence I've been privy to thus far is indeed circumstantial. I also find it telling that if Russia did indeed want to damage the US and they did collude then why wouldn't they say it? That would be near irreparable damage. Why not release any kompromat, or whatever the unholy term they use is, on Trump?

Imagine how damaging a tape of him getting pissed on by skanky strippers would be.

Reason says those things probably do not exist.

The only smoking gun would be something from the other side it seems- could we even trust that? A video, pictures etc? Admission of guilt is all we will likely get but even that can be coerced.

All i am getting though is that this is not and never had been about collusion. All Mueller has been seemingly trying to do is build some weird obstruction case for impeachment, and the only obstruction anyone is coming up with is that he tweeted about the investigation while it was going on.

So like opining about it is tantamount to obstruction now? The whole thing just seems weak, billions of lawyers and bazillions of dollars later, we have one dude lying to the FBI about something and the president tweeting?

Funny thing is, I don't care personally about Trump. i don't have a rooting interest. If he is guilty of crimes prosecute his ass, fine. But the whole thing just seems like a big waste of time and money over nothing. I don't get it. Obama administration sends guns to Mexico, and the justice department yawns. Hillary, well we don't need to count all the shady dealings, and nothing.

All this guy did was win an election and tweet, and let's impeach his ass. It's not even a left v right, my team vs your team thing, I just hate the inefficiency and obvious bullcrap. This is all a bunch of bullcrap and it's distracting from actual issues, like all that recount BS from Jill Stein, you know for democracy purposes. This sideshow needs to end. Not because I love trump or I am team maga or any of that, I actually wanted Paul or Cruz and didn't like a lot of what Trump was about, but I am just tired of all this garbage. And yes it does come from both sides at times, but on this issue it's just bullcrap, and we all know it.

I can just say that personal intuition, after having seen Trump build his character in public for thirty five years or so, he does not get the benefit of the doubt from me.

I can also say that conversations about watergate were and still are the same. There is a large amount of confirmation bias, as I just admitted mine- but it's because he's always proven to be who I thought he was before.

> I can just say that personal intuition, after having seen Trump build his character

> in public for thirty five years or so, he does not get the benefit of the doubt from

> me.

>

> I can also say that conversations about watergate were and still are the same. There

> is a large amount of confirmation bias, as I just admitted mine- but it's because

> he's always proven to be who I thought he was before.

>

> Maybe I will be pleasantly surprised.

And maybe your intuition will prove true, but the bottom line is there doesn't seem to be any evidence, and in the time where every fudging thing under the sun leaks, to me that shows they may not have crap and are just BSing.

Honestly, the whole twitter thing has kind of made me realize that trump is probably just a useful idiot with decent intent. The problem is he surrounds himself with people who manipulate him to no end. He thinks he's in control but history shows he rarely ever was.

Who told you that? How do you know? Have you been briefed on the investigation? I'm not saying there is, mind you, I'm just saying that's a hard stance to take on the absence of something when you can't prove a negative.

> Who told you that? How do you know? Have you been briefed on the investigation?

> I'm not saying there is, mind you, I'm just saying that's a hard stance to take

> on the absence of something when you can't prove a negative.

Keyword is SEEM. Obviously none of us know, but with the amount of leaks we get daily, you think you would have heard or something more than a fake report by ABC or tying an obstruction case to his tweets... about anything Big D has actually done.

I can't prove crap, but it seems neither can Mueller. Obviously I don't know for sure, but it seems like those clowns are just spinning their wheels to me, because we haven't heard crap about anything, and all we have is one dude who lied to the FBI? weak..

I honestly don't think anything will come of it. But I'm certainly willing to admit that Trump's been milking that victim card hard, all the time, and typically when you're looking left and someone tells you to look right, in politics it's GENERALLY not because there's something really cool going on at the right.

My biggest hang up with trump is that I never felt like I knew another candidate on a personal level. I do with Trump because he has been in the spotlight for so long- he does not fit my view of a man with integrity or honest values. It's an illusion I'll admit- they are all the same person in different skin- but they lie well on TV and express a willingness to support some of my values.

Maybe Trump is the most honest of them all because he is so direct. I don't know, but it strikes me wrong that he is so arrogantly going about flaunting these qualities.

The burden of proof is with those who hold the conspiracy theory. There is no evidence, which surprisingly you guys admit. Feeb basically said it. "I give it credence because I don't like Trump." But you sound like fundamentalists Christians... "You can't prove God doesn't exist!" Well, there isn't a reason to other than feeding your own cognitive dissonance and biases.

All this talk about "It's Mueller Time!" and "Trump's going down." Seem to have more to do with fantasy. A lot of the left thinks Trump is this villainous character. Bringing down the 'monster' is #1, by any means necessary.

But fair point about waiting until the "investigation" is over. It may go in a completely different direction based on some of the stuff I'm reading. The corruption isn't where the MSM is pointing.

There is not adequate worldly evidence to believe what a fundamentalist Christian believes. This one is a bit different.

I'm interested in being sure that our political system is ours. Trump is either unlucky to be the man in office when the new Russian world strategy was in full effect and detected or there is more to that.

A question that I'm ignorant on but welcome informed answers: why does the "new" republican ideology so closely resemble that of Russia? And why does Russia want to coerce strict nationalism on the world? Brexit etc.

The Russian propaganda utilized in many elections around the world and their work on social media etc that has been exposed is fact. Why?

There is no crime in having a political ideology- maybe trump just jumped on the populist wave. It's all right in front of us though. How do you just look passed it?

I'm a nationalist for sure, though mostly in an economic sense. I never voted republican until Trump and believe he moved the GOP ahead 20 years. Obviously, it's a winning message. A lot of Europe will head in that direction over the next few decades too, mostly out of necessity. Open borders and political correctness is killing Europe as we speak. I think the globalists, socialists, leftists want a villain to be the poster-child of the antithesis of their ideology, hence why Putin and Russia are always talked about. Not sure why anyone would have any issues with populism.

I am not a Republican. I have certain principles, and I vote for the person who most closely aligns to those principles, be they Dem, Rep, Tea, or whatever. I knew Trump was going to enact things more close to what I believe is right than Hillary, so I voted for him in the general. And so far he has.

I don't know what the Russian ideology is or any of that, and I will admit I am not as knowledgeable in the Russian political system as I am in ours.

This is not a philosophy that can persist. It is what we came from. This is why we have countries, it is why America exists and the English culture and ideology was left behind.

I respect the ideology and understand the desire, especially as a person who has been to places in America with a "pure" culture of people who are scared crapless of outside influence.

The next step in a pure nationalist / traditionalist whatever you want to call it society is always further down the path of totalitarianism.

I guess what I'm trying to say in a round about way is that ship has sailed- the culture and people are here, society is secularizing, the sexual revolution has happened etc. Without a radical purge of ideas, people etc the nationalist worldview cannot be fully realized.

Putin is not shy that he is doing that. Do we want to do it as well?

Putin is being used as a poster child because in this world he would be the most powerful man. The US has fought against this for decades- the established post WW 2 American led world is what we've tried to maintain. That is gone.

Well, you're falsely characterizing what nationalism is, which is often the problem discussing it. One side thinks it's some racial supremacy thing with heavy amounts of social conservatism. The other sees it as "putting their country first" in terms of economics and foreign policy.

I do NOT want Russia's social policies in the US and I think it's absurd to think we'd ever head in that direction. Maybe if the fainting couch left gets it's way. They have far more in common with social conservatives these days.

I don't think it's absurd to want a better deal for your country when dealing with others or that strong immigration policies are racist. Economic nationalism is the future for America and the west, and that's a very positive thing. I think the reason I was so sure Trump would win is because he is so necessary.

I don't see anyone here looking to put anyone down. No race, gender, country etc. Just get the best deal for our country that we happen to be citizens of. I don't see anyone desiring a perfect culture or totalitarianism. If anything the Obama regime seemed more inclined to move towards some weird totalitarian type governance. Most trump voters that i know just wanted freedom to earn and spend their money as they wanted. Freedom from the government is really what I want, and what Trump voters that I know want.

I just want the government to stay the fudge out of our normal lives, and for foreign policy to get a good deal for everyone concerned, with our country not getting shafted.

I will preface this with: these are my thoughts on why the Russia thing is such a talking point. Not saying that Trump wants this and I truly believe he does not but I can see why it needs to be looked into:

Nationalism is not the issue. It's the rest of the forced morality, sexual constraint, religious stigma and social issues that arise from traditionalist thought. By calling that nationalism you need to redefine "America" or force definitions of America that were not dually intended. This is what we are doing.

In essence they define nationalism as an ideal state of the nation for their purpose. I'm in total agreement of doing what's in our best interest as a nation economically but that's where it stops. My views on religion are quite clear and I'm passionately anti, more anti than the worst of them.

This is what the intelligence community fears. We are allowing globalization of Russian ideology- not nationalization of American ideology.

I want to learn what I want, read what I want, worship what I want, smoke what I want, drink what I want and fudge who I want.

I want to live in a world that accepts experience and wisdom as supported fact, as opposed to delusion and faith.

> I will preface this with: these are my thoughts on why the Russia thing is such a

> talking point. Not saying that Trump wants this and I truly believe he does not but

> I can see why it needs to be looked into:

>

> Nationalism is not the issue. It's the rest of the forced morality, sexual constraint,

> religious stigma and social issues that arise from traditionalist thought. By calling

> that nationalism you need to redefine "America" or force definitions of America that

> were not dually intended. This is what we are doing.

>

> In essence they define nationalism as an ideal state of the nation for their purpose.

> I'm in total agreement of doing what's in our best interest as a nation economically

> but that's where it stops. My views on religion are quite clear and I'm passionately

> anti, more anti than the worst of them.

>

> This is what the intelligence community fears. We are allowing globalization of Russian

> ideology- not nationalism of American ideology.

>

> I want to learn what I want, read what I want, worship what I want, smoke what I

> want, drink what I want and fudge who I want.

>

> I want to live in a world that accepts experience and wisdom as supported fact, as

> opposed to delusion and faith.

>

> Someone thinks they need to decide these things for me.

>

>

I am not trying to be a troll or anything, but I honestly don't understand what you're trying to say. The Russia thing is basically, did Trump do some illegal acts with Russia to get elected. I feel like we all know the answer is no.

Is Trump obstructing this investigation by tweeting his thoughts about it? is that even possible?

That is all that this whole thing is about.

You saying you want to do what you want to do... i mean a more conservative government is what you want then, right? Those are what conservatives want. To do what the fudge they want to do without being passed some bullcrap law that prevents it.

I'm explaining why the Russian thing needs to be seen through in the best way I can. It's not just to get someone in trouble but why do we want to obstruct Russian ideology at all? If the influence of Russia was there then those scenarios are legit. It's not as simple as less government: that's a good carrot to dangle.

Lol. Let's leave the part out where we get our values from a 3000 year old book (see Supreme Court) and disregard science. Fortunately for us we know what reactionism is and aren't fool enough to be duped by the redefining of words.

Obviously that is irreconcilable for me- the faith and lack of regard for wisdom.

I'm not sure why we perpetuate this liberal / conservative dichotomy other than to undermine intention.

The free speech thing is tired: we should value free speech but we should not value speech that is intended to divide or harm. College campuses are not a forum for free speech. Make a podcast?

Perhaps. My point is why would an institution that is most often funded by the state, grants and alumni with an accredited curriculum have interest in allowing unsolicited ideology to be spread in their venues? The things they teach aren't guided by freedom of speech- the exact opposite.

It seems like common sense.

I do believe in free speech but I also recognize that there is a forum for whatever you want to say to be construed safely and non-confrontationally.

I guess I feel like this Russian thing needs to stop wasting our tax money on a bullcrap witch hunt.

THEN if we, as a society, want to research Russian influence or intrusion in our culture let's do it. Because these are two separate things.

As far as free speech, I think anyone should be able to preach, proselytize, pray, or say anything they want on any campus (unless it's private) as long as it's not injuring another. The school itself should not suggest what religion to you follow, but allow any student to profess any views, even communist or racist or Nazi. The others students' disdain ought to quell those last.

Free speech is free speech. I am personally not Christian, but I've got no problem with you telling me about why you think I should be. Worst thing is I say no thank you.

This is why colleges exist. They teach established fact. The myth that 18-22 year olds are indoctrinated is bullcrap. Most of them experiment with many things in their lifetime before they settle on a final belief. Your video illustrates that.

I spent 10 years on a major university campus and the only thing ever forced at me was Christianity, the Bhagavad Gita, and beer. Equating liberal ideology with established fact is sometimes the issue at hand. I've heard many conservative Christians use that argument to rail on sciences. Why don't they teach creationism in college? They do- it's taught in mythology courses. There are also a multitude of religious universities. You think they teach science as fact?

It's a business. With an agenda. It does not include letting every crackpot get into the heads of your customers.

The source of this idea maybe in the fact that Berkeley was a big player in the free speech movements. Just a coincidence. And probably some drugs.

> This is why colleges exist. They teach established fact. The myth that 18-22 year

> olds are indoctrinated is bullcrap. Most of them experiment with many things in their

> lifetime before they settle on a final belief. Your video illustrates that.

This is so delusional. You may agree with the ideology, but don't say they "just teach facts." Come on. This is especially true in the social sciences. I'm fine with them pushing their ideology, but they MUST let people speak out that don't. Especially when the students want it. The fact that students on these far-left campuses are in the business of de-platforming speakers and even riots/violence tells me they can't really defend their ideology very well.

I really hope universities change by the time my kids are ready for college.

> I spent 10 years on a major university campus and the only thing ever forced at me

> was Christianity, the Bhagavad Gita, and beer.

Well, you clearly rejected Christianity. Why do you think other students don't have the intellect to reject/accept ideas like you do? Do you think they need to be protected from speech?

> Equating liberal ideology with established fact is sometimes the issue at hand.

I went to community college and I now work as a contractor. Several friends of mine are finishing up at Universities now. I also frequently watch debates/lectures with my wife because we enjoy the dialogue. I've met some real stupid people with varying degrees. This is the problem is that we've moved from a meritocracy when it comes to admission.

It used to be a big deal that you went to a university. It was a respectable thing. I wish we'd get back to that.

Are you even familiar with some of the insanity that goes on at these universities? College is not what it used to be.

Yes I'm aware and that should disgust anyone. It's stupid and embarrassing. You post videos of outlier events at ridiculously ivory tower institutions. I'd say if a student goes there they have an intent already. I went to a real, normal university.

> I think I make more than a professor, but 100% honest I'd love to be one.

>

> Also, I think you need a PhD and I'm not going to school for that long, I dropped

> out after 3 years.

I think you nailed it. You can do better. That's a conservative staple. I think that's commendable. It's also why liberals are teachers more- they more readily take less for their time. They also spend more time pursuing things that are "unnecessary" and are not efficient with "role" in any economical sense.

> goes there they have an intent already. I went to a real, normal university.

I did post a couple 'normal' ones. But I don't see how the fact that they are "Ivory tower" takes away from my point. The most prestigious universities should have the highest standards and be the hardest to get into. That's clearly not the case.

> goes there they have an intent already. I went to a real, normal university.

STATE U BIAS! You were drinking, werent you?

two things, what institutions fit the ivory tower designation?andreassuring to see someone who understands what free speech in america actually means,and its limits in public and private discourse- A university education pays off

I meant ivory tower as in a ridiculous paradigm of the far extents of political correctness. All this "college campuses are liberal crapholes" crap is being supported by video of liberal crapholes. They aren't all like that. Not even close.

The idea that intelligent young minds are feeble enough to soak in anything you tell them is garbage. This is why the "free speech" wino fest is defeating itself. Overwhelmingly students don't want to hear and see this divisive coprolalia on their campuses. Administration is to blame so far as they admitted students who aren't naive enough to fall for it.

Really gives insight on what you think about people in general. Students, by the time they hit college are legal adults. The fact that you think they can't handle ideas and that the university needs to "protect" them from them, is actually a horrifying thought.

> I meant ivory tower as in a ridiculous paradigm of the far extents of political correctness.

> All this "college campuses are liberal crapholes" crap is being supported by video

> of liberal crapholes. They aren't all like that. Not even close.

>

> The idea that intelligent young minds are feeble enough to soak in anything you tell

> them is garbage. This is why the "free speech" wino fest is defeating itself. Overwhelmingly

> students don't want to hear and see this divisive coprolalia on their campuses. Administration

> is to blame so far as they admitted students who aren't naive enough to fall for

> it.

So what's the big deal then? Let these "Nobody wants to hear them" speakers come to the campuses and preach to nobody, there's nothing threatening about that. Myself, I'm the guy who flips from NPR to Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck with a wry grin on my face.

You should never be in the position of "(I'm saying) Nobody wants to hear from this guy, so we just won't allow them to speak". That's not okay.

I honestly don't know how much is being turned away versus just being protested. The protesting thing is a protected right as well.

Yes. Let them come but let them get way they get. Don't protect the kids why protect a divisive speaker? I'm not sure how far you guys want to take that but a good example is Richard Spencer- his message is not really open for interpretation.

> I honestly don't know how much is being turned away versus just being protested.

> The protesting thing is a protected right as well.

>

> Yes. Let them come but let them get way they get. Don't protect the kids why protect

> a divisive speaker? I'm not sure how far you guys want to take that but a good example

> is Richard Spencer- his message is not really open for interpretation.

I don't know, it just all gets overhyped.

If someone, anyone, is desired by some students as a speaker, then they should be allowed to come and the students who don't like the guy can stay the fudge home and not worry about it. Or they can make their signs and stand outside and peacefully protest.

But these idiots who want to get violent and all this bullcrap, those guys can get arrested. Fudge those guys, I don't care if they are liberals, conservatives, or what.

A solution would be to privatize the schools or to just require anything off curuculum to be off campus.

As much as I'd like to go church to church and spread a message I can't. They won't allow me to. The excuse is because they aren't public. But fudge if every police officer in town is not directing traffic in front of these mega churches so they can get back home faster.